For Windows 8, a Familiar Launch Story

Windows enthusiasts are understandably spooked by news that Windows 8 hasn’t met Microsoft’s internal sales projections, but the situation is far more nuanced on the shelves of retailers both electronic and brick and mortar. Sure, Windows 8 will barrel its way to millions in unit sales through sheer inertia, but what’s really holding back the OS is an issue that plagues every Windows release: uninspiring new PC designs. (See also, "PC Sales Flat as Market Waits for Windows 8").

Not surprisingly, this is what Microsoft credits internally for the slow start of Windows 8: PC makers’ “inability to deliver,” as first reported in "Windows 8 Sales Well Below Projections, Plenty of Blame to Go Around." But this is nothing new: For over a decade now, every single Windows release has been marred by the slow and uninspiring reactions of the firm’s PC maker partners.

I’ve watched from the sidelines as Microsoft has basically begged PC makers to innovate throughout the years. I recall the firm’s call for innovative, home theater-like hardware that could accompany the first release of Windows XP Media Center in 2002, for example. Most PC makers responded by ignoring the release, and the only one that did show up at launch, HP, shipped a blocky and humongous tower PC that was decidedly ill-equipped for the American living room.

And so it has gone ever since.

But with Windows 8, Microsoft is selling revolution, not evolution, and it has been warning PC makers for years to step up their game. Windows 8 is most at home on mobile computing devices, not traditional PCs, and it features a multi-touch system integrated into the core of the OS, not as a tacked-on layer. To drive home this point, Microsoft has begun shipping its own line of touch-enabled devices, the Surface, and has ported Windows to the ARM architecture, a low-power chipset type that powers smartphones and tablets, not PCs.

In basketball, there’s a term called “fake hustle.” As an example, imagine the ball is about to go out of bounds, and a player feints or moves as if we were going to actually try and save it. Fake hustle shouldn’t be confused with real hustle—a player crashing into the audience to actually save the ball—just as PC maker’s new PC designs shouldn’t be confused for actual innovation.

Granted, there are only so many forms a tablet can take. But most new PCs fall into a familiar category—like that Ultrabook, but with multi-touch—or fan out into an increasingly bizarre world of gymnastic, Transformer-like contortions: Devices that bend, fold, and spindle and try to be both excellent laptops and tablets and failing at both. Do you want a sometimes-tablet that is really heavy? Or a tablet with a lousy keyboard that clips on?

I’ve described the PC ecosystem in the past as Windows' greatest strength and, paradoxically, its greatest weakness. The launch lineup of new PCs for Windows 8 exemplifies both traits, providing as it does a bewildering range of choice, with virtually none of it being interesting at all. Innovation? If pre-loading crapware and destroying the Windows experience in the process was considered innovation, this launch lineup would be the best one yet.

And while Microsoft’s own Surface tablet comes the closest to the pure Windows experience, even it bobbles and drops the ball in too many key areas to be taken seriously … yet. For starters, it runs the woefully inadequate Windows RT on the woefully inadequate ARM platform, eschewing the more compatible Intel platforms that power real PCs. As I discovered testing a rival tablet running Intel’s new Atom “Clover Trail” platform in "Windows 8 Architecture Wars, Part 1: Clover Trail vs. ARM," Windows 8 and Intel’s latest chipset run rings around the Windows RT/ARM combination. It’s not even close.

But the Surface is marred by other poor decisions: a power cable that doesn’t latch securely onto the device, the lack of a docking solution or optional cellular broadband, and too-high pricing. Microsoft has shown the world how to design an elegant tablet, but it also handed its PC maker partners a gift, an opening through which they could field competitive designs of their own.

So far, the response has been pretty uninspiring.

But then, this is nothing new. I do expect PC makers to recover, trim down their lineups to the models that people actually want, and begin to truly innovate with all-new models in 2013. But given history, Microsoft’s first-ever entry into the PC/device market, and the revolution that is Windows 8, I can’t believe that none of them could do better right up front.

Discuss this Article 36

All very true, what a shame. But you know its not just the hardware design thats to blame. PC World in central London had an impressive number of pcs and laptops up and running, but the screens looked just awful, a complete mess of dark purple, essentially. Not clean and simple and attractive, just a stodge of conflicting colours. On the larger screens all the tiles forced into a large solid blocks to the left due to the utterly pointless less layout restrictions so no swipe function was unavailable to test. Its just not good enough. What an opportunity so sadly wasted. Getting this new UI was crucial, Im just so disappointed they messed it up.
This really was an opportunity to let people customise their workspace to suit them perfectly within a wide set of parameters, which they chose instead to restrict. Why?
So easily solved, here http://browse.deviantart.com/?order=5&q=windows+8+start+screen#/d5llbdk

All good points, Paul! IMO, this attitude among OEMs cost Microsoft a head-start on Windows XP tablets. I've thought from the start that the Surface tablet was introduced as a reference standard in order to put OEMs ON NOTICE that if they don't come through, Microsoft WILL!
If Microsoft follows through with the Surface 8 Pro at sub-ultrabook pricing, I expect that we will see some real movement with Windows 8.

Sorry Paul, but you calling the ARM architecture "woefully inadequate" only makes you sound silly, envious or just plain biased.
There are ZILLIONS of devices running off the same architecture now. If the architecture would indeed be what you claim it to be, there would be zillions of unhappy users all over the world, and Apple wouldn't have zillions of dollars in it's pocket. The problem with your reasoning is that your mind seem to be locked in the past, as you refuse to understand that bloated software just won't cut it anymore into users pockets. Microsoft blaming OEMs for lack of innovation also is a flawed argument, as all Microsoft did on Windows 8 was the inclusion of innovation proven to be successful on products they first thought would fail.

So much negativity! I think there are plenty of new laptops that are interesting. We have to remember that there is a large amount of people that aren't looking for something innovative or flashy. The Lumia 920, for example, comes in an array of flashy colors, but the standard black model outsells them all easily. Some people just want something good, reliable, and affordable. I was at Best Buy yesterday and passed by the computer section on my way to the bathroom and was astounded by the amount of people that had laptops in their boxes and at checkout.

I suspect, or at least I hope that Microsoft's decision to not release Surface Pro until Jan of 2013 is because of refinements to the system that MS want's to insure work well. I agree that MS PC partners have dropped the ball on innovative design especially regarding tablets.

After I posted, I read your Windows 8 Architecture Wars, Part 1 article, which I found much more down to earth. I look forward to your Windows 8 Architecture Wars, Part 2 article.
I also look forward to a future review of the Surface Pro devices. I guess the reason Microsoft is not ready to sell those now is because they are still struggling with weight vs. battery life. Maybe Clover Trail will be the answer.

@WATERCHEMIST: to each, his own. It appears you've already made your decision, so whatever works best for you I would do.
From my workplace point of view, unless the RT can be managed in an enterprise environment with the proper tools it won't be coming on our network. I hear the Pro is coming out in the new year and wait with bated breath for that one so we can have a true, managed, useful tablet solution for our clients, not the complete disaster that the iPad was (and still is) around here.
As for the consumer side of things, I think Microsoft has made an interesting version 1 of this device. I still own the original iPad and it is now starting to show it's age. Apple did not get it quite right the first time either, but each iteration definitely got better, as is their s.o.p. Hopefully either OEMs start making better stuff to run Win 8 or v2 of Surface comes with the stuff that is missing (and frankly, should have been included, Microsoft!)

And simply ... what about availability ? It's just impossible to get even one of what you call these silly design ! I could vaguely maybe understand for the CloverTrail ones as it seems Intel has been having issues with the production, but what about the other designs ?
No proper Windows 8 hardware is available. I was yesterday at a Windows 8 launch event organised by Microsoft, the hardware on dispay in the showroom was appaling. People were really disappointed.

I disagree strongly on your persistent negative view of the Surface. I do think that the price, if about $200 cheaper, would certainly erase any concerns about the value of the device. But I use this thing on a constant basis, and it has become an extremely valuable addition to my daily life which exists to help consumers with every day technology. It has a more than its fair share of performance issues and yup, my cover came apart at the seams this morning, but these are early adoption growing pains. These pains would be a lot easier to handle if the price was cheaper.
On the other good point that you make, I walked into Best Buy last weekend, and it was a horror show. They had a lineup of All in One Pc's, only running i3 processors with standard onboard graphics. The problem was the Demo software that Best Buy chooses to hamper these units with. Every single one of them was running like CRAP, a great way to reproduce this would be to go over to the Photo's app and try to simply scroll left or right. All of them would not accelerate on scroll. It was pathetic.
I finally found the best deal in the whole place. A little Asus touch screen with an i3 for $499 that had no Demo software on it. This thing was awesome, fast as hell, and had an amazing touch screen. They could have called it nice catchy cute name like the Asus Lightning or something, but no. If you want to go and get one, just tell the guy behind the counter you want an Asus Model: Q200E-BHI3JT45. Rolls right off the tongue doesnt it?
MS has done what no one thought they could. They have generated a lot of excitement around a piece of hardware with a nice catchy easy to remember name. Surface. They are the only ones that are about to get it right and I hope they keep pumping out the hardware till they get it perfect. So close.

Hi Paul.
Hate to say I told you so, but I did - months ago. I think the manufacturers have failed to step up because Microsoft's vision is cloudy. They bowed to the hype about the PC being dead and in the process have failed to take the desktop to the next level.
And yes there is a next level - although I guess right now I may be the only person in the world who cares, but what of it? The underpinings of the MS environment are astounding; the innovation embodied in Sharepoint, Lync, Exchange and the cloud creation and managment tools surrounding it do not have any equal. But they fail to engage the user at the gut level - the "ah-ha" moments that ignite a user's spirit are all too rare. What we hiundreds of millions of desktop jockeys want(ed) was a new desktop that would get the juices flowing.
Didn't happen.
When I designed Valdocs for the QX10 I wanted to call it "The Epson Mind Amp". The american manager who replaced me at Epson refused - said it reminded him of drugs. Truth is, I was looking to expand user's consciousness. And not co-incidentally, the only other guy in the industry with that kind of vision was Steve Jobs.
It's not too late for Microsoft. They've GOT the technology. What they don't have is a vision that takes users to the next level. The manufacturers who didn't step up to the plate are simply reflecting that reality. As you say, they'll come around - sort of - if only by the sheer weight of need for managed systems in the corporate environment.
But it remains for some other company to show the way. With Steve's departure there are no dreamers left at the top. Just a few old farts like me.
Will some company step up? Sooner or later, I suppose, but for now, I just don't see it.

It seems increasingly clear that you simply have a rather biased negative view on ARM.
Describing the hardware as 'woefully inadequate' is simply not true at all, and having a few off the cuff 'benchmarks' to back that up really doesn't prove your point. You fail to make even the most simple observations about what backward compatibility actually /means/ for users.
Windows RT provides an experience that many people actually want - a computing system that's easy to use and hard to break. It's an experience that many people have longed for for years, and some have avoided buying into the world of computers altogether, perceiving traditional PCs to be too complicated. Show them an iPad and suddenly it all seems more appealing. Microsoft -by producing Windows RT- have delivered that dream too, and like the iPad competitor, that easy-to-use, hard-to-break experience /cannot/ be mucked up by some dodgy plugin, background tasks, or the other myriad of desktop software that you have for some reason deemed essential.
Even for the power user, a tablet system running Windows RT can be a superb secondary computing device. Such users are more likely to have two computers; a desktop system where they can run desktop software, and a tablet that can deliver the quick -'pick up and go' convenience that such systems are /supposed/ to provide. Again, I wouldn't want that experience being undermined by desktop software that simply wasn't designed with that kind of use-case in mind.
Again, that isn't to say 'backward compatible' computing has it's place, but there is a huge opportunity for Windows RT, and it's a shame that you're not able to be a bit more objective about this and see it from the point of view of /real users/, and not just power users.

Mr. Thurrott,
This was an interesting article. As a frustrated Media Center user since 2002, I can understand the need for PC vendors to do something new and actually innovative. But how can this really be expected when Microsoft designs, builds and ships a product (Surface Tablet) that is lacking in key areas? If Microsoft can't produce a benchmark product that others should emulate, then how can we expect OEM PC vendors to suddenly find the Jony Ives of Windows and do something genuinely new and innovative that not only works, but is quality as well?
I have a sad feeling that Microsoft has produced a product that is neither a great tablet or laptop or even PC replacement. For a device that was supposed to be 'no compromises' is appears to be full of them.
Maybe as with most Microsoft products, be it hardware or software, it will be version 2.0 or Service Pack 1 that makes them not only a contender, but a design guru that OEM vendors will want to get inspired by.
Most of the 'new' products I have seen appear to have come from the fertile mind of a Dr. Hunter S. Thompson, and not someone that understands how computers are used and how to take the use into a new design direction.

Paul;
What would Windows RT have to do to be a first class citizen?
From what I can tell you're disappointed that it can't run desktop applications, however this is entirely arbitrary, and makes absolutely zero acknowledgement of the very real possibility that some people might not actually /need/ desktop software, and that indeed running such software can detract from the overall experience of a tablet computer that is otherwise harder to break, and delivers a consistency of UX that cannot be matched on an Intel system.
My fear here is that you're simply peddling an attitude that could help kill off Windows RT in the long term, and then where would we be? Back to a situation where Windows tablets work well out of the box (assuming they weren't loaded with junk to start with), but degrade over time.
I say again, that degradation can't happen on Windows RT, and I'd have hoped you'd find this to be something worth fighting for, at least for the sake of ordinary folk who otherwise find technology confusing, and don't always understand what the reasons are for problems or breakdowns (the people who want to 'just work' and stay working) those people could gain allot by using Windows RT.

You bring up good points with the Surface- lack if a cellular option and other docking connectors are legitimate problems. I really believe that a device can be greater than the sum of its specs, but lack of certain components creates marketing problems even if in most cases it doesn't create usage problems. How much would it have cost to throw in a GPS? In an era of Retina iPads and the crazy high res Nexus 10, having 1366 X 768 screens on most (all?) of the non-ivy bridge devices seems stupid. I have a Surface RT and am not complaining about its screen res, but iI'm tired of reading review after review by some iPad toting tech pundit about how his/her eyes burned after having tried to read a web page on the surface now that they are "used to" a retina display. I went to the MS Store in NH and with the exception of the Surface, the designs were uninspiring. They didn't even have the Sony 20" featured on their commercial or the HP 2X- two designs that are at least interesting.
A little off topic- but they only had one Win8 phone from each carrier in the store for customers to handle- all on tethers that were too short to hold comfortably, and connected to the back of the phone by a huge block that made it impossible to appreciate the ergonomics. Good job MS!

I agree that the current lineup of Windows 8 PCs is confusing, at best. I would love a new device, but I really am not sure what to purchase. Convertibles like the Yoga and the XPS 12 look cool, but they are probably too heavy to be used as tablets. The Surface runs on stupid ARM. The detachable tablaptops might be a good solution, but like you said their keyboards could be inadequate.
Paul - do you have any suggestions in mind for the ideal form factor?

I'm not interested in anything that has to do with Windows 8. Apple is making all the hardware that I'm finding myself lusting after. The iPad mini is expensive but kind cool at the same time - the first e-reader sized tablet that is any good IMHO. That new 13" MacBook Pro with Retina display is really calling me. How long before Microsoft supports a 13" laptop with that kind of resolution. And please don't tell me to get an Asus ZenBook, i've been down that road already, it didn't end well. And Surface RT is a huge disappointment. I really think it's a great design, too bad Microsoft doesn't have Apple's chops for hardware execution. Make your own decisions, but I'm thinking seriously about jumping ship. Sorry.

Paul, I couldn't agree with you more. I'm just back from Orlando and a visit to the MS store. They had all the HTC and Nokia phones from the different carriers on display, lots and lots of Surface RTs, and a smattering of AIOs and ultrabooks from other vendors. But only one non-MS tablet (based on ARM), no Clover Trails at all, and none of the "convertible" laptops. Store was two down from the Apple store, and from a pleasing look point of view, they were compatible.
MS store felt like there a lot of products missing -- even some of the new mice and keyboards from MS were MIA. The surface is a nice looking piece of H/W and from my limited playing around with it, it seemed responsive. Clover Trail is rumored to be in very short supply -- supposedly Intel is having some teething problems. The disaster might not be W8, or MS's compromises in the surface RT, the big fail might be the inability to get everything lined up and available for the holiday selling season -- something that Tim Cook has been very good at -- of course Apple doesn't have a bunch of cat-like OEMs needing herding :grin.
Even on some simple things the OEMs are a disaster. Take Samsung: the Series 9 is a wonderful machine for W7, but when they refreshed it for W8 and the holidays: no touch enabled display. The 13" model tops out at 4GB RAM and a 256 GB SSD. The new Apple powerbooks go up to 8GB RAM, 512GB SSD, and that awesome retina display -- all in a 13" form factor. I would die for a Series 9 with those specs on W8 -- and that's just some modest evolution of an already nice product -- no revolution required.
I have yet to find any MS OEM with an Ultrabook that can match the new Powerbooks. Power users may not be a big market segment, but they sure can do a lot to capture mindshare.